›
To take part in discussions on talkSFU, please apply for membership (SFU email id required).

Does reality conform to the mind or does the mind conform to reality?

Helen
edited July 2009 in General
I would love to know what the minds of this forum believe about how this world of ours is perceived. I am sort of divided on the subject quite frankly. On one hand the mind conforms to reality. One example of this is how our eyes view objects (i.e. the sky). When we look at the sky we see blue, but in actuality the sky is every color except blue. This concept has always intrigued me. On the other hand, a good example of reality conforming to the mind is the fact that a human being can't think of something that doesn't exist. If you try to think of something that "doesn't exist" it would simply be an amalgamation of things that do exist. Like if you say thought of a pink elephant, a creature that doesn't exist on this earth, you would be thinking of the color pink and applying it to an elephant. Both of these obviously exist so in actuality a pink elephant CAN exist, if only in your mind. Elaborate if you will, i'm interested in knowing how people feel about this topic.

Comments

  • randomuser
    edited February 2009
    Helen;47608 said:
    On the other hand, a good example of reality conforming to the mind is the fact that a human being can't think of something that doesn't exist. If you try to think of something that "doesn't exist" it would simply be an amalgamation of things that do exist. Like if you say thought of a pink elephant, a creature that doesn't exist on this earth, you would be thinking of the color pink and applying it to an elephant. Both of these obviously exist so in actuality a pink elephant CAN exist, if only in your mind. Elaborate if you will, i'm interested in knowing how people feel about this topic.
    I'm kind of confused when you say we can't think of things that don't exist, then you say we can think of things that don't exist, but they would be in our imaginations.

    There are things that exist, that we can't possibly wrap our mind around, things like what is beyond space, because we don't have the building blocks in our minds to put them together.

    I guess it depends on your question, are you suggesting there is an objective or a subjective reality? In no way can reality conform to the mind, unless its a subjective reality.
  • Helen
    edited February 2009
    I guess you could put it that way...is or isn't reality subjective?
  • FerrousWheel
    edited February 2009
    Our mind does its level best to accurately represent reality based on the flawed data we receive from our senses. It doesn't always work that well.

    As for imagining things that don't exist, I'm really not sure what you mean. You say no one can imagine something that couldn't exist, and then give an example of something that can only exist in your imagination. What's exactly are you trying to say?
  • Ether
    edited February 2009
    I think she's trying to say that the range of things that we can possibly imagine is partly limited by our past experiences.

    For example, if someone lived in a black and white world all their lives, but tried to imagine the colour red, they would not be able to do it.
  • FerrousWheel
    edited February 2009
    Okay, so that's a point in favor of our minds being shaped by reality. Right with you there I suppose.
  • icerider
    edited February 2009
    Well, in COGS 100, we talked about a lot about how our brain creates our experience. The brain can get the big picture pretty accurate, but little details will often be missed and the brain will make its best guess to what those details are. There are times when we'll distort reality in order for it conform to our own ideas of what the world should be like and to improve our self-esteem.
  • FerrousWheel
    edited February 2009
    I'm in cogs 100 right now. It's a great class. At any rate, my overall impression of the class is that we don't just miss little details, we miss hugely important stuff that it seems like we should catch. We also overestimate the extent to which our actions are conscious and intentional on a fairly regular basis. I think that this is the biggest stumbling block for any claim of reality "conforming" to fit with the mind; scientific research shows that if it does conform, it doesn't very much because our impressions of the world contrast dramatically with things as they actually are.
  • Ether
    edited February 2009
    But how do we know how things actually are? The only information we ever get is from our senses.

    I hate to throw it out there, but there's always the possibility of a Matrix-like situation going on. We're all brains in vats, and that sort of argument.

    I'm not saying it's probable (though, some would disagree) but it's at least possible.
    That would be a case of reality not conforming to the mind. Our minds would be mistaken about what reality actually is.
  • FerrousWheel
    edited February 2009
    Ether;48442 said:

    That would be a case of reality not conforming to the mind.
    Right. My argument is that there's essentially no reason to believe that reality ever conforms to fit the mind's idea of it. As for brains in vats, yes it's theoretically possible but so are a lot of things. The world seems real enough that it's worth treating as real until we have evidence suggesting a better course of action.
  • BSang
    edited June 2009
    FerrousWheel;48452 said:
    Right. My argument is that there's essentially no reason to believe that reality ever conforms to fit the mind's idea of it. As for brains in vats, yes it's theoretically possible but so are a lot of things. The world seems real enough that it's worth treating as real until we have evidence suggesting a better course of action.
    I suppose it would depend on your definition of reality.

    If you define reality as being separable from all individuals and existing by its self, then sure, the mind would have to conform to reality.

    If you were to define reality as something that is relative, that is different for each person depending on various factors, then reality would have to conform to the mind, as the mind is what forms the specific "reality" for the individual.

    This brings me to a further question: What is reality?
  • FerrousWheel
    edited July 2009
    Reality is the universe as it actually is, despite the semantic wringer you just put it through. What's different for each person is there experience of reality. Reality is what is actually real, nothing more and nothing less. The argument you're veering toward is that we can never know for certain if our experiences accurately reflect that reality. While technically true, this leads straight back to the brains in vats argument and my reply.

    My reply, again, is that literally all available evidence indicates a physical reality that exists independent of our perceptions and experiences. Until evidence to the contrary emerges any serious discussion of relative or contingent reality is intellectual wankery.

    And wanking is fine. Everyone loves a good wank and it's even healthy from time to time. That being the case, when the question "does reality conform to the mind" is asked there is only one answer that makes even a shred of sense: "Not according to the evidence."
  • BSang
    edited July 2009
    So, you're saying that through our perceptions and experiences (which are our only exposures to the Universe), we find evidence that a physical reality exists independent of our perceptions and experiences. Is reality not conforming to the mind then? We perceive our reality, and through this, you state that we find evidence that reality is independent from us. Is this observation alone not reality conforming to the mind?

    Also, by the question asked, I assumed we were talking about individual reality here. Individual reality, of course, is subjective, as it is different for each individual.

Leave a Comment